[hackers] [farbfeld] Makefile-workaround for OpenBSD || Laslo Hunhold

commit bfb27d1baad6f69fa610281809a394617a76e60a Author: Laslo Hunhold AuthorDate: Mon May 29 18:29:00 2017 +0200 Commit: Laslo Hunhold CommitDate: Mon May 29 18:29:00 2017 +0200 Makefile-workaround for OpenBSD Thanks Hiltjo for reporting this!

Re: [hackers] [farbfeld] Makefile-workaround for OpenBSD || Laslo Hunhold

> Makefile-workaround for OpenBSD At last! > Thanks Hiltjo for reporting this! Well, I've been warning you with the first patch long ago. > For some reason, OpenBSD make does not add $(BIN).o to the > dependency list when it sees the $(BIN) target rule. It does so > however

Re: [hackers] [farbfeld] Makefile-workaround for OpenBSD || Laslo Hunhold

On Mon, 29 May 2017 18:46:53 +0200 Quentin Rameau wrote: Hey Quentin, > Well, I've been warning you with the first patch long ago. yes, and admittedly, even though it was a painful process, I learned a lot about make and how sadly infested the ecosystem is with GNU

Re: [hackers] [farbfeld] Makefile-workaround for OpenBSD || Laslo Hunhold

On Mon, 29 May 2017 18:46:53 +0200 Quentin Rameau wrote: > The essence of the problem is this sentence in the spec[0]: "A target that has prerequisites, but does not have any commands, __can__ be used to add to the prerequisite list for that target.

Re: [hackers] [farbfeld] Makefile-workaround for OpenBSD || Laslo Hunhold

On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 07:15:15PM +0200, Laslo Hunhold wrote: > > As far as I can see it, we are left to write down each target > explicitly. Which is not an issue in my opinion in our case. Like I said on IRC: Generally speaking I'd prefer if the Makefile is 20 lines longer and very